|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
LA_Lakers_Rule
Franchise Player
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 19482
Location: The X-Files
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 6:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DaMuleRules wrote: | | LA_Lakers_Rule wrote: | | DaMuleRules wrote: | | Huey Lewis & The News wrote: | | LA_Lakers_Rule wrote: | | as we all know based on a simple search of the internet there are literally 100's of reports on the web regarding studies that show "5.7 Million Non-citizens may have Cast Illegal Votes in the 2008 election". So while we as yet do not have any stats on this for the 2016 election, one would certainly conclude based on the known significantly greater influx of non-citizens entering the country since that time there would be far more than that who would have likely illegally voted 8 years later in the most recent 2016 election |
Before addressing the rest of your nonsense, I need you to provide a credible link. At least one of the hundreds at your disposal. |
He didn't say any of those 100's of reports were credible.  |
You are absolutely correct, I did not say one way or the other.... what I did say is: | LA_Lakers_Rule wrote: | | ....whether one likes to hear it or not; as we all know based on a simple search of the internet there are literally 100's of reports on the web regarding studies that show "5.7 Million Non-citizens may have Cast Illegal Votes in the 2008 election". |
what one chooses to believe is reflected for the most part by which direction each individuals personal biases might slant obviously. |
I won't claim to speak for you, but what I believe is not a "choice" but something that is arrived at after analysis of a body of information and critical thought- which is why I avoid having my information dictated by a google search. But I get why you choose to go with your biases. |
We are in agreement then as I too believe that the goal for me, as it ideally should be for anyone, is to arrive at a well-considered conclusion supported by "critical thought" that would undoubtedly need to be based on well-founded reasoning. Where and how this information is attained is of no matter as long as the information attained is reasonably accurate and rational thought processes and critical analysis is used to reach a sound conclusion which in turn can help determine the accuracy of the information attained. As to personal bias, well it's generally a product of human nature but is something that to the best of each of our abilities should be tempered as much as one possibly can. This can be accomplished as much as possible when one uses common sense in combination with deductive logic that includes well-rounded reasoning that includes keeping at all times an open mind and on the basis of common sense reach a well grounded conclusion accurately and introspectively by analyzing what makes sense based on the entirety of the information available to them.
All of this can only be accomplished by leaving prejudice and bigotry aside but at the same time not allow the fear of what others might tend to claim is just that on the basis that conclusions drawn are so very often perceived to be at odds with a culture that continues to expand on this ever present and growing politically correct attitude that as we know tends to permeate our discourse these days unfortunately resulting in unfounded judgement placed on those whose goal is simply to reach honest conclusions unfettered by the very biases that are the foundation of that PC culture. To be fair, this PC culture is what very often tends to twist the thinking of those that would like to contribute to the discussion in the public square in an honest way but find that they cannot due to this very PC culture and how those that use the PC attitude to label others in unfair and prejudicial ways that they would otherwise make the claim is their goal to avoid. Let's face it, it's always easier, more comfortable and significantly less threatening to go along to get along which is what we see so much of the time as opposed to actually standing up for honest fair minded critical analysis.
I can give an obvious example of what I'm talking about above. If a person is to even mention the possibility that a significant number of non-citizens may have voted in the general election those who live within this personal bubble of PC culture will based on nothing more than a "knee jerk" reaction assume the worst of that person very often in the most demeaning of terms as we all know of which I think we all know as well what it is exactly that I'm talking about. This practice by those who use this PC culture to disseminate invectives to those whose only goal is to honestly draw a conclusion based on a heartfelt analysis of the information made available to them in order to reach a fair minded conclusion is flat out wrong and clearly damaging to any ability to have honest discourse between both sides of any issue. Regardless of the fact there may be absolutely no animosity towards anyone the practice of drawing on conclusions that can be characterized by the PC culture in negative tones stamps out honest and forthright critical thought and in so doing in many cases perpetuates the misconceptions and sometimes outright lies that the PC culture characteristically wants so much to sustain at all cost.
When a poll is done where a question is asked of people who identify as non-citizens whether or not they have illegally registered to vote and a certain percentage of those people polled (13% in the case of the poll I cited) is used with absolutely no malice of forethought to make an honest and fair minded point doing so should not in my mind be used by the PC class to denigrate the person who sites the poll with the goal in mind to reach a common sense conclusion based on deductive logic. That being said the question you should ask yourself, why would anyone illegally register to vote with no intention on voting in the first place. Common sense is based on connecting the dots and is based on the information made available to us. To extend that common sense logic based on deductive logic is used with every intention to reach an honest and forthright conclusion it reasonable to assume that a large number who would otherwise provide a different answer would have a tendency to not want to admit to illegally registering to vote (possibly for fear of reprisal in some way) and armed with that common sense logic assume that the 13% that admitted to this is perhaps very likely a lower than accurate number. Regardless of how one might analysis the results of the poll there is no denying that of the 13% that did actually answer in the affirmative that is that they did in fact register illegally to vote would in fact likely illegally vote as well, otherwise once again I ask the pertinent question -- what would be the point to register in the first place? And of course we all have a reasonably accurate idea of the number non-citizens currently living in the US, so a fair minded extrapolation of the 13% who polled in the affirmative can be made directly from the poll results as to what we have in totality throughout the country as far as the number of non-citizens that are illegally registered to vote simply on the basis of the answers provided to us by the very people who took the poll. This does not mean that a person who sites this poll is in any way intending to demean or act in a "racist" manner in the least which I would contend is one of if not the worst invectives a person can label someone with and is in this out of control PC culture so often unfairly done with absolutely no foundation to do so. No the intentions is certainly not to be in any way demeaning but instead is simply an honest forthright analysis of what we have available to us as a result of a scientific poll, but nevertheless we will have significant numbers of the PC crowd who will jump at the opportunity to label in very distasteful ways in order to stamp out honest discussion and fair minded analysis. I ask you in a fair minded and honest manner to consider in your own mind what would you yourself personally conclude would be the reason to register to vote illegally? What is sad is that so many in the PC in-crowd are simply not willing or possibly not even able to comprehend at all as to what I'm even trying to explain here that we find is so often the case which is so very unfortunate because in my mind keeping an open mind and civil tongue is very critical to maintaining a fair and honest discussion between all sides of each and every one of the issues of the day. I contend that just because I am not in fitting with the PC crowd does not in any way characterize me as "biased" but rather I contend this to be just the opposite in my view and if anyone is in any way "biased" it would arguably be those trapped in the PC bubble that are unable to keep the inherent bias in check that the very PC bubble has trapped them in that so often keeps their sphere of contribution to the meaningful issues of the day to be lacking in substance and in many cases trapped in the realm of nothing beyond that of offering up hallow platitudes, but then that's just one persons opinion among many....
_________________
Rule = win titles  
Good judgment comes from experience and a lot of that comes from bad judgment. - Will Rogers ... 
Last edited by LA_Lakers_Rule on Sat Jun 24, 2017 7:47 pm; edited 4 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
>nothing good was written here<
Last edited by ContagiousInspiration on Sun Jun 25, 2017 6:48 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
splashmtn
Star Player
Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3961
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LA_Lakers_Rule wrote: | | DaMuleRules wrote: | | LA_Lakers_Rule wrote: | | DaMuleRules wrote: | | Huey Lewis & The News wrote: | | LA_Lakers_Rule wrote: | | as we all know based on a simple search of the internet there are literally 100's of reports on the web regarding studies that show "5.7 Million Non-citizens may have Cast Illegal Votes in the 2008 election". So while we as yet do not have any stats on this for the 2016 election, one would certainly conclude based on the known significantly greater influx of non-citizens entering the country since that time there would be far more than that who would have likely illegally voted 8 years later in the most recent 2016 election |
Before addressing the rest of your nonsense, I need you to provide a credible link. At least one of the hundreds at your disposal. |
He didn't say any of those 100's of reports were credible. |
You are absolutely correct, I did not say one way or the other.... what I did say is: | LA_Lakers_Rule wrote: | | ....whether one likes to hear it or not; as we all know based on a simple search of the internet there are literally 100's of reports on the web regarding studies that show "5.7 Million Non-citizens may have Cast Illegal Votes in the 2008 election". |
what one chooses to believe is reflected for the most part by which direction each individuals personal biases might slant obviously. |
I won't claim to speak for you, but what I believe is not a "choice" but something that is arrived at after analysis of a body of information and critical thought- which is why I avoid having my information dictated by a google search. But I get why you choose to go with your biases. |
We are in agreement then as I too believe that the goal for me, as it ideally should be for anyone, is to arrive at a well-considered conclusion supported by "critical thought" that would undoubtedly need to be based on well-founded reasoning. Where and how this information is attained is of no matter as long as the information attained is reasonably accurate and rational thought processes and critical analysis is used to reach a sound conclusion which in turn can help determine the accuracy of the information attained. As to personal bias, well it's generally a product of human nature but is something that to the best of each of our abilities should be tempered as much as one possibly can. This can be accomplished as much as possible when one uses common sense in combination with deductive logic that includes well-rounded reasoning that includes keeping at all times an open mind and on the basis of common sense reach a well grounded conclusion accurately and introspectively by analyzing what makes sense based on the entirety of the information available to them.
All of this can only be accomplished by leaving prejudice and bigotry aside but at the same time not allow the fear of what others might tend to claim is just that on the basis that conclusions drawn are so very often perceived to be at odds with a culture that continues to expand on this ever present and growing politically correct attitude that as we know tends to permeate our discourse these days unfortunately resulting in unfounded judgement placed on those whose goal is simply to reach honest conclusions unfettered by the very biases that are the foundation of that PC culture. To be fair, this PC culture is what very often tends to twist the thinking of those that would like to contribute to the discussion in the public square in an honest way but find that they cannot due to this very PC culture and how those that use the PC attitude to label others in unfair and prejudicial ways that they would otherwise make the claim is their goal to avoid. Let's face it, it's always easier, more comfortable and significantly less threatening to go along to get along which is what we see so much of the time as opposed to actually standing up for honest fair minded critical analysis.
I can give an obvious example of what I'm talking about above. If a person is to even mention the possibility that a significant number of non-citizens may have voted in the general election those who live within this personal bubble of PC culture will based on nothing more than a "knee jerk" reaction assume the worst of that person very often in the most demeaning of terms as we all know of which I think we all know as well what it is exactly that I'm talking about. This practice by those who use this PC culture to disseminate invectives to those whose only goal is to honestly draw a conclusion based on a heartfelt analysis of the information made available to them in order to reach a fair minded conclusion is flat out wrong and clearly damaging to any ability to have honest discourse between both sides of any issue. Regardless of the fact there may be absolutely no animosity towards anyone the practice of drawing on conclusions that can be characterized by the PC culture in negative tones stamps out honest and forthright critical thought and in so doing in many cases perpetuates the misconceptions and sometimes outright lies that the PC culture characteristically wants so much to sustain at all cost.
When a poll is done where a question is asked of people who identify as non-citizens whether or not they have illegally registered to vote and a certain percentage of those people polled (13% in the case of the poll I cited) is used with absolutely no malice of forethought to make an honest and fair minded point doing so should not in my mind be used by the PC class to denigrate the person who sites the poll with the goal in mind to reach a common sense conclusion based on deductive logic. That being said the question you should ask yourself, why would anyone illegally register to vote with no intention on voting in the first place. Common sense is based on connecting the dots and is based on the information made available to us. To extend that common sense logic based on deductive logic is used with every intention to reach an honest and forthright conclusion it reasonable to assume that a large number who would otherwise provide a different answer would have a tendency to not want to admit to illegally registering to vote (possibly for fear of reprisal in some way) and armed with that common sense logic assume that the 13% that admitted to this is perhaps very likely a lower than accurate number. Regardless of how one might analysis the results of the poll there is no denying that of the 13% that did actually answer in the affirmative that is that they did in fact register illegally to vote would in fact likely illegally vote as well, otherwise once again I ask the pertinent question -- what would be the point to register in the first place? And of course we all have a reasonably accurate idea of the number non-citizens currently living in the US, so a fair minded extrapolation of the 13% who polled in the affirmative can be made directly from the poll results as to what we have in totality throughout the country as far as the number of non-citizens that are illegally registered to vote simply on the basis of the answers provided to us by the very people who took the poll. This does not mean that a person who sites this poll is in any way intending to demean or act in a "racist" manner in the least which I would contend is one of if not the worst invectives a person can label someone with and is in this out of control PC culture so often unfairly done with absolutely no foundation to do so. No the intentions is certainly not to be in any way demeaning but instead is simply an honest forthright analysis of what we have available to us as a result of a scientific poll, but nevertheless we will have significant numbers of the PC crowd who will jump at the opportunity to label in very distasteful ways in order to stamp out honest discussion and fair minded analysis. I ask you in a fair minded and honest manner to consider in your own mind what would you yourself personally conclude would be the reason to register to vote illegally? What is sad is that so many in the PC in-crowd are simply not willing or possibly not even able to comprehend at all as to what I'm even trying to explain here that we find is so often the case which is so very unfortunate because in my mind keeping an open mind and civil tongue is very critical to maintaining a fair and honest discussion between all sides of each and every one of the issues of the day. I contend that just because I am not in fitting with the PC crowd does not in any way characterize me as "biased" but rather I contend this to be just the opposite in my view and if anyone is in any way "biased" it would arguably be those trapped in the PC bubble that are unable to keep the inherent bias in check that the very PC bubble has trapped them in that so often keeps their sphere of contribution to the meaningful issues of the day to be lacking in substance and in many cases trapped in the realm of nothing beyond that of offering up hallow platitudes, but then that's just one persons opinion among many.... |
hold on LLrule.... lets take a step back.
remember, all that was asked of you is to prove your point of view with credit sources.
here's my point of view with credible sources.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/18/arizona-voter-fraud_n_4296907.html
within the huffpost article there's links to the original findings as far as voter fraud goes. what you need to understand in the huff post situation is not that its just a very very very tiny amt of it going on at all. The why to the little bit they found going on. most of it is a lack of understanding of the law and how it applies to each individual. there are people with criminal records that did not know they could not vote(its one thing if you killed some people. but what if you got a record for something not nearly as crazy). their are people who are illegally here in the states or have been here legally on green cards for decades. yous tay some where that long its home in your mind. Common sense tells me that I could see how a person would think they would be able to vote. because they are not even thinking about all the rules that go into if you're not an "official" citizen. THe reason i know this is because I've worked with a few people with green cards and they have family members/friends that have allowed their cards to expire not paying attention to the dates. the only time they realize it expired is when they want to do something where they need to show it as proof(like leaving the country on vacation and trying to get back in.)
So after all those people are off. then you have even less people that you could say has committed voter fraud.
i have another link. its a website a lot of us have used in the past to determine whether something online or sent to us in an email was real or fake or some where in between.
http://www.snopes.com/three-million-votes-in-presidential-election-cast-by-illegal-aliens/ | Quote: | CLAIM
Three million non-citzens voted illegally in the 2016 presidential election.
RATING
UNPROVEN
ORIGIN
On 14 November 2016 — not even a week after the results of the 2016 presidential election were announced — our inbox exploded with messages requesting that we investigate the claim that more than three million votes were cast by “illegal immigrants” or “illegal aliens” (non-citizens). In some cases it was also claimed that these three million voters are “under investigation” for fraud, or that three million votes for Hillary Clinton will be “voided” because they were illegal. Under federal law, non-citizens cannot vote in a presidential election.
The first thing we found was that while no such claim has been reported in the mainstream media, it has been repeated on scores of partisan, right-leaning web sites since the 8 November election under the guise of “news.” Here are a few examples: |
lets take a look at this one
http://www.inquisitr.com/3920315/donald-trump-illegal-immigrants-voting-evidence-for-voter-fraud-2016-election-true-the-vote-2017-news/
| Quote: | According to the Washington Post, this quote referenced illegal tampering by Russian interference within only the state of Michigan. The Pennsylvania filing was more carefully worded, stating that “there is no evidence — or even any allegation — that any tampering with Pennsylvania’s voting systems actually occurred.” However, on Twitter, Trump specifically stated that he was considering “serious voter fraud in Virginia, New Hampshire and California” to be the source of the alleged problem.
To put the statement of Trump’s legal team in context, Jason Miller, a former senior communications advisor for Trump, once was asked about the 2016 vote recount by Jill Stein. When asked for evidence of millions of illegal immigrants voting, Miller highlighted the 2014 Monkey Cage blog but he also cited a Pew Research study.
“Some numbers include the Pew Research study that said approximately 24 million, or one out of every eight, voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or significantly inaccurate. And in that same Pew Research study, the fact that 2.5 million people have registrations in more than one state.”
In response to Miller’s comments, the Fact Checker section of the Washington Post claimed the two studies had been “previously debunked.” David Becker, the primary author of the Pew Research report, also clarified that the purpose of the study was not to highlight voter fraud.
“We found millions of out of date registration records due to people moving or dying, but found no evidence that voter fraud resulted,” Becker tweeted. |
and lastly... i know for a fact the voting setup is questionable at best since til this day they still have not yet changed my address. yes I still in L.A. county, but by never changing my address in years. I can't vote for any local district people that belong to the district I live in. i will only be able to vote for those in the district i USE to live in.
This is not voter fraud. This is an different issue altogether. And its not a repub vs dem issue. its a "get your voting system tight" issue.
**FYI, I've changed my address every way possible. DMV, using the voter website, I did it while at the voting poll, i did it by mail. i changed it with one of those people that register you to vote at the local grocery store.. STILL its not fixed.***
Lastly,
The only reason you hear republicans or republican voters making this complaint is because the only way they can win an election is to get rid of all of the non white people. since we know. the republicans do not get many votes from any other group. That is their strong hold. So they have to pray that their is voter fraud from "others" to get rid of those votes to keep winning.
This logic is the same reason they keep trying to add ways to stop black people from voting that are official citizens and have been here generation to generation as long as every white generation.
It's called, if i can't win fair and square. I'll cheat or pray that you get disqualified.
Here's the real issue. Non white people that vote. usually vote for dems. Thats just the reality of it. Instead of republicans changing their platform to fit these people in. they would rather make these votes go away.
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/042715/changing-demographics-and-2016-election.asp
| Quote: | Most Influential Demographics Changes Expected in 2016
The first demographic most commonly mentioned is the emerging minority vote. Per the Pew Research Center, the United States is on track to be a majority non-white country by the 2040s. As whites begin to decrease in population percentage—down to approximately 60 percent in 2020—another race-based demographic has to increase.
Based on all demographic research, Hispanics will be that segment of the population. In 2012, Hispanics made up 17 percent of the entire U.S. population, but this number will almost double to 31 percent in the coming half-century. There are two main reasons for this increase in population. Immigration laws have recently loosened in the U.S., resulting in an influx of migratory Hispanics, and there will be a birthing boom from the Hispanic immigrants who originally came in the 1990s.
The aging population is the second demographic most often discussed in the 2016 election. As of 2010, only 13 percent of all U.S. citizens were aged 65 and older. However, this figure will grow to 18 percent by 2030. This group will be extremely influential in the coming years, beginning with the 2016 election, because as people age, they are more likely to vote. In the 2012 presidential election, only 24 percent of 18-29 year olds voted compared to 51 percent of all Americans over the age of 30.
While the minority and aging demographic are the two most widely discussed and influential changing demographics, there are other groups that may also have an impact.
|
and then..
| Quote: | Political Advantages in Changing Demographics
In the 2016 election, the demographic changes expected in this country will go a long way in determining the next president. Predicting who will carry the largest rising demographics is simple, but determining how all the demographics will balance out is more complicated.
The emerging minority vote is strongly predicted to support a Democratic candidate. In the 2012 election, Democrats acquired 78 percent of the minority vote. If Democrats continue to appeal to minorities at this rate, then the growing minority demographic will heavily support the election of a Democratic candidate.
In much the same way that Democrats have a positive relationship with minority demographics, Republicans one with the aging demographic. In 2012, 56 percent of voters aged 65 and older voted Republican, and in the 2014 midterm elections, 57 percent supported the GOP.
With the two largest growing demographics seemingly spoken for in the 2016 election, the election winner will largely be determined by which demographic change is more powerful: growing minority or aging populace. The 2016 presidential election and future election cycles may tilt on whether minority growth outweighs the increased likelihood that those 65 and over actually cast ballots. (For more, see: The Market And Presidential Promises.)
The Bottom Line
Demographics—and a political party’s ability to appeal to these groups—have shaped political elections in the past and will continue in this manner. For 2016, in particular, the demographics most likely to alter the election are the growing minority and aging baby-boomer voters. The political party most successful in drawing strength from their politically aligned demographic will be most successful in the election.
|
and for the record. if hillary clinton would've understood the age portion in this above quote. she would've known donald trump had more of a chance to win then she first thought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LA_Lakers_Rule
Franchise Player
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 19482
Location: The X-Files
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 11:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^ all very well stated and good analysis in many respects. 
the only quibble I might have is the suggestion that the goal for Republicans is to depress the minority vote. Yes, this is the mantra of the left no doubt and of course the mantra of the right is more so that perhaps illegals are stealing more votes than most imagine to be the case.
I will not debate whether the latter is true as I'm not convinced that there is that much illegal voting occurring one way or the other. I am saying that if 13% of a 11-20 million population are registering to vote then it is not unreasonable to assume there is illegal voting occurring as well at some level of which there would be no evidence in most cases because it is obviously so difficult to track, but again we can't know this for certain or not. And as to any evidence either way, just as you have well stated how disorganized and in disarray governmental agencies are as reflected by the fact they cannot even get your address straight I'm not surprised that any evidence would be forthcoming either even if it was possible to track which as I've already stated is not the case. There is really simply no way to garner this kind of evidence regardless of whether or not illegal voting is occurring at some levels or not.
I would suggest to you that any effort to make sure votes are legitimate is a noble goal and should not be characterized in a way that the left try to portray it as an ulterior goal to suppress voter turnout. I mean how difficult is it to acquire an acceptable ID of some kind (drivers licenses are not required as you know). So, yes perhaps the right is drawing at straws in regards to non-citizens voting illegally and the left have every right to argue there side of the issue on this point. But for the left to take it a step further by suggesting that attempts to validate voters is suppressing voter turnout is in my opinion arguably equally drawing at straws from the other end of the political spectrum. I am fully aware of the demographics you have so well stated but that has nothing at all to do with legitimate attempts to validate the legality of voters. Knowing that we can depend upon a voting system that legitimizes the results of political races is an important element of a vibrant democracy and to delegitimize attempts at validating the most fundamental aspect of a democracy by characterizing these attempts to validate voting in any other way than what is stated is the goal is flat out wrong.
So in conclusion, perhaps there is little to nothing to be concerned about as far as non-citizens illegally voting, I will certainly defer to your well stated points regarding this since as I've stated no one can really know for certain one way or the other. But with that said, I would plead for those who want to characterize attempts to make sure votes are valid as attempts at voter suppression to please stop the charade in that regard. There should be no argument from anyone who would want anything other than to know that all tabulated votes are legitimate. So while the left may characterize those whose goal is to try to legitimize voter outcomes in other terms like voter suppression which I would argue is both unfair and inaccurate on its face, it can equally be argued as attempts to garner more votes to their respective side just as what I would suggest is incorrectly concluding the same thing on the right for simply wanting to legitimize voting results. The difference is that attempts to ascertain the legitimacy of votes cast should clearly not be characterized as attempts to swing votes in any one direction or the other as opposed to simply wanting to do nothing more than to do what they say is the goal which is to make sure votes are legitimate.
_________________
Rule = win titles
Good judgment comes from experience and a lot of that comes from bad judgment. - Will Rogers ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LA_Lakers_Rule
Franchise Player
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 19482
Location: The X-Files
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2017 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| plashmtn wrote: |
The only reason you hear republicans or republican voters making this complaint is because the only way they can win an election is to get rid of all of the non white people. since we know. the republicans do not get many votes from any other group. That is their strong hold. So they have to pray that their is voter fraud from "others" to get rid of those votes to keep winning. |
I was thinking more about your approach and how people in general look at politics.
You're approach and for others that would say the same thing is looking purely through the lens of a Democrat. That would be that the ONLY reason a person (in this case Republicans) would want to talk in terms of voter fraud was purely political and nothing more and a sincere concern regarding voter fraud is non-existent. In other words the issue of "voter fraud" is an excuse to get more votes.
And the other side of the coin as well, anyone who would only be concerned about voter suppression is to make sure more Democrat votes get tabulated. And once again, any sincere concern regarding voter suppression is non-existent.
I have not really looked at it purely this way myself. I've always thought that it was important to validate voter results and to be sure that the result we get in our elections is accurate.
So I would suggest to some that take the point of view that you have expressed which is that decisions revolve entirely around politics that perhaps there is another side to the coin and that some, like myself, have a sincere concern to make sure votes are tabulated accurately.
In the first election when Bush won and there was this big debate about Florida, my position was that if you were going to recount votes then the entire state would have to be recounted, not just cherry picked states like Gore was trying to have done that favored his party. And if it was impossible to actually do a complete recount then leave the results as they were. How in the world can anyone suggest that it would be a fair outcome if either side were to just pick the counties that favored their own respective parties, but then once again that's politics. If Bush had wanted to do the same thing that Gore suggestions I would have objected to that as well.
Now on the subject of voter fraud, some will say there isn't any or that what voter fraud there is doesn't amount to much and isn't worth the effort to do anything about. That's a plausible conclusion, but then I'm not sure what is wrong with doing all we can to make sure voter fraud to the extent that it does exist is kept to a minimum isn't a valid goal. Those who say there isn't any voter fraud of any kind I think are naive, nothing in this world is that "pure". Certainly there is some voter fraud, it's inevitable in my view. But I do understand the argument that it's minimal and possible not at a level where it impacts elections in general.
On the other hand, this concept that requiring some level of identification to make sure people who vote are who they say they are seems to be common sense. And I'm at a loss how this would cause voter suppression quite frankly. If a person does not have a drivers license a person always has an option to get a state identification card and can be done simply by filling out a long hand form if a person does not use computers. If a person lives in a rural area where mail is not delivered then I'm all for providing another method to get this information to them. If we use a bank we have to identify ourselves in some way, why does it not make sense for people who vote to identify as well?
In conclusion, I come down on the side that to whatever extent voter fraud does exist (to really believe it is non-existent is totally naive and unbelievable in my view) all of us should in some way work toward finding ways to eliminate as much of this as possible to what ever extent it exists. As to any concern that doing this places an undue burden on the voter should be seriously looked into as well. So instead of coming down on either side on these issues and assuming it's all purely political may not be accurate in all cases as far as the point of view of each individual on the subject matter. Perhaps politicians are more devious in this regard, but I'd like to think that the approach of the common citizen is more altruistic and the positions they hold are not just for political reasons.
_________________
Rule = win titles
Good judgment comes from experience and a lot of that comes from bad judgment. - Will Rogers ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2017 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anyone else feel this way
The more Trump complains about Obama not doing enough the more pressure it should be putting on him to do something? 
He is the POTUS who has sworn to defend us from all enemies.. Our country was attacked by Russia and now Trump can't deny it.
Is this reality..
Why is nobody calling him out on this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
governator
Retired Number
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 25092
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2017 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ContagiousInspiration wrote: | Anyone else feel this way
The more Trump complains about Obama not doing enough the more pressure it should be putting on him to do something?
He is the POTUS who has sworn to defend us from all enemies.. Our country was attacked by Russia and now Trump can't deny it.
Is this reality..
Why is nobody calling him out on this? |
because his supporters (and currently, that include the majority of GOP in govt) judge him by how angry the left is |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Huey Lewis & The News
Star Player
Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Posts: 5234
Location: So what's the uh...topic of discussion?
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2017 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LA_Lakers_Rule wrote: | | plashmtn wrote: |
The only reason you hear republicans or republican voters making this complaint is because the only way they can win an election is to get rid of all of the non white people. since we know. the republicans do not get many votes from any other group. That is their strong hold. So they have to pray that their is voter fraud from "others" to get rid of those votes to keep winning. |
I was thinking more about your approach and how people in general look at politics.
You're approach and for others that would say the same thing is looking purely through the lens of a Democrat. That would be that the ONLY reason a person (in this case Republicans) would want to talk in terms of voter fraud was purely political and nothing more and a sincere concern regarding voter fraud is non-existent. In other words the issue of "voter fraud" is an excuse to get more votes.
And the other side of the coin as well, anyone who would only be concerned about voter suppression is to make sure more Democrat votes get tabulated. And once again, any sincere concern regarding voter suppression is non-existent.
I have not really looked at it purely this way myself. I've always thought that it was important to validate voter results and to be sure that the result we get in our elections is accurate.
So I would suggest to some that take the point of view that you have expressed which is that decisions revolve entirely around politics that perhaps there is another side to the coin and that some, like myself, have a sincere concern to make sure votes are tabulated accurately.
In the first election when Bush won and there was this big debate about Florida, my position was that if you were going to recount votes then the entire state would have to be recounted, not just cherry picked states like Gore was trying to have done that favored his party. And if it was impossible to actually do a complete recount then leave the results as they were. How in the world can anyone suggest that it would be a fair outcome if either side were to just pick the counties that favored their own respective parties, but then once again that's politics. If Bush had wanted to do the same thing that Gore suggestions I would have objected to that as well.
Now on the subject of voter fraud, some will say there isn't any or that what voter fraud there is doesn't amount to much and isn't worth the effort to do anything about. That's a plausible conclusion, but then I'm not sure what is wrong with doing all we can to make sure voter fraud to the extent that it does exist is kept to a minimum isn't a valid goal. Those who say there isn't any voter fraud of any kind I think are naive, nothing in this world is that "pure". Certainly there is some voter fraud, it's inevitable in my view. But I do understand the argument that it's minimal and possible not at a level where it impacts elections in general.
On the other hand, this concept that requiring some level of identification to make sure people who vote are who they say they are seems to be common sense. And I'm at a loss how this would cause voter suppression quite frankly. If a person does not have a drivers license a person always has an option to get a state identification card and can be done simply by filling out a long hand form if a person does not use computers. If a person lives in a rural area where mail is not delivered then I'm all for providing another method to get this information to them. If we use a bank we have to identify ourselves in some way, why does it not make sense for people who vote to identify as well?
In conclusion, I come down on the side that to whatever extent voter fraud does exist (to really believe it is non-existent is totally naive and unbelievable in my view) all of us should in some way work toward finding ways to eliminate as much of this as possible to what ever extent it exists. As to any concern that doing this places an undue burden on the voter should be seriously looked into as well. So instead of coming down on either side on these issues and assuming it's all purely political may not be accurate in all cases as far as the point of view of each individual on the subject matter. Perhaps politicians are more devious in this regard, but I'd like to think that the approach of the common citizen is more altruistic and the positions they hold are not just for political reasons. |
All of that typing just to say "I believe illegals stole votes based on nothing but my own desperate desire for it to be true."
_________________
"All wars are civil wars, because all men are brothers."
http://forums.lakersground.net/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=13018 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
splashmtn
Star Player
Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3961
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2017 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LA_Lakers_Rule wrote: | | plashmtn wrote: |
The only reason you hear republicans or republican voters making this complaint is because the only way they can win an election is to get rid of all of the non white people. since we know. the republicans do not get many votes from any other group. That is their strong hold. So they have to pray that their is voter fraud from "others" to get rid of those votes to keep winning. |
.................
Now on the subject of voter fraud, some will say there isn't any or that what voter fraud there is doesn't amount to much and isn't worth the effort to do anything about. That's a plausible conclusion, but then I'm not sure what is wrong with doing all we can to make sure voter fraud to the extent that it does exist is kept to a minimum isn't a valid goal. Those who say there isn't any voter fraud of any kind I think are naive, nothing in this world is that "pure". Certainly there is some voter fraud, it's inevitable in my view. But I do understand the argument that it's minimal and possible not at a level where it impacts elections in general.
On the other hand, this concept that requiring some level of identification to make sure people who vote are who they say they are seems to be common sense. And I'm at a loss how this would cause voter suppression quite frankly. If a person does not have a drivers license a person always has an option to get a state identification card and can be done simply by filling out a long hand form if a person does not use computers. If a person lives in a rural area where mail is not delivered then I'm all for providing another method to get this information to them. If we use a bank we have to identify ourselves in some way, why does it not make sense for people who vote to identify as well?
In conclusion, I come down on the side that to whatever extent voter fraud does exist (to really believe it is non-existent is totally naive and unbelievable in my view) all of us should in some way work toward finding ways to eliminate as much of this as possible to what ever extent it exists. As to any concern that doing this places an undue burden on the voter should be seriously looked into as well. So instead of coming down on either side on these issues and assuming it's all purely political may not be accurate in all cases as far as the point of view of each individual on the subject matter. Perhaps politicians are more devious in this regard, but I'd like to think that the approach of the common citizen is more altruistic and the positions they hold are not just for political reasons. |
ok lets address the first 2 paragraphs first, then we'll get to the last one last.
1. remember when i told you republicans are intentionally trying to stop minorities from voting, especially minorities that they know do not vote republican and on average will vote dem at a 70%+ clip or more(blacks are at like 90 or something crazy like that..hispanics or those who speak spanish are a bit less since you have people that speak spanish(not talking about someone who just learned how to) who identify as white in turn they identify as republican (ex. white cubans down in florida).
but lets let the real stats talk and not me.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/160373/democrats-racially-diverse-republicans-mostly-white.aspx
^^Very good read
| Quote: | Implications
One of the more important realities in American politics today is the substantial divergence in the racial and ethnic composition of the major political parties. Almost nine in 10 Republicans are white, in stark contrast to the racial and ethnic composition of the overall adult population. On the other hand, the Democratic Party is disproportionately nonwhite.
The future of the two major political parties depends on two factors. The first is whether these patterns of party identification change in the years ahead. The ability of the Republican Party to make inroads among nonwhites has been much discussed in recent months, particularly the GOP's efforts to improve on the 13% allegiance that Gallup data show it obtains from Hispanics. Another path to growth for the Republican Party would be an increase in its penetration into the white sector of the population, only 35% of which now identifies as Republican. On the other hand, the Democratic Party will grow if it too can extend its identification among whites, and maintain or strengthen its position among nonwhites.
A second factor that will affect the future of the political parties in the U.S. is straightforward demographics. Projections show that the nonwhite proportion of the American adult population will grow in the years ahead. This means that if current partisan allegiance patterns prevail, the size of the Democratic base will be in a better position to grow than will the Republican base. |
all in all. republicans are the white party only, dems are the white and everyone else party.
So we know statistically speaking the more laxed the feds are on immigration(not talking illegal..we're talking legal). the more chance you have of non-whites taking a bigger chunk of the population, which will most likely result in more democrats or more dem votes.
it's not rocket science.
again. the only way republicans can win elections in places that are not 90% white republicans already, is to do what? Stop the other people from voting .
There are 2 methods.
method 1 is called VOTER SUPPRESSION. this started when they gave blacks the right to vote yet they had them taking tests in order to be able to vote. wait... you said i could vote..but now you have a test for me to take. nothing would be wrong with said tests IF it wasnt done with the knowledge that a lot of blacks were under educated all due to what? white racism that kept them from reading, and/or kept them out of adequate schools for a very very long time.
so when you ask a black person to take a test at that point. you are more or less saying "haa haa, i know you wont pass the test...so thats how i will keep you from voting."
now this type of thing has changed into many forms. one is gerrymandering on racial lines(thats the difference before you say bu bu but the dems have done it too. ) The republicans are intentionally trying to make sure a black vote counts far less than a white vote in places where they know they have a nice white republican stronghold of voters.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/05/north_carolina_s_voter_suppression_law_was_apparently_too_racist_for_the.html
(^^another good read^^)
| Quote: | | On Monday morning, the country’s most discriminatory voter-suppression law died with a whimper. With no noted dissents, the Supreme Court refused to review a lower court decision striking down North Carolina’s HB 589, the “monster law” that would have disenfranchised thousands of citizens. The justices’ inaction ensures that HB 589 will stay dead—and that the most emphatic ruling against the Republican assault on minority suffrage will remain on the books. |
and then read this one.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/civil-rights/339404-its-time-to-restore-full-power-to-the-voting-rights-act
now for Method #2. Change laws to make it harder to get into this country(especially for non whites/or those who will not identify as white and become most likely republican voters.)
and last but not least. Let's make sure certain groups of people Can't Vote. similar to the above voter suppression stuff(coming with all sorts of extra things you need to do in order to vote. No. this is what you call a real trick. You throw people in jail for light weight crimes and make them like they are harsher than they really are. This will cut off their ability to vote since you can't vote if you're in jail/prison. you can't vote if you get out after a felony crime.
| Quote: | Can a felon vote?
Maine and Vermont are the only states with unrestricted voting rights for people who are felons. Both states allow the person to vote during incarceration, via absentee ballot and after terms of conviction end. |
that combined with what is called prison gerrymandering
https://aclufl.org/2016/03/21/federal-court-declares-prison-gerrymandering-in-jefferson-county-florida-unconstitutional/
| Quote: | Federal Court Declares “Prison Gerrymandering” in Jefferson County, Florida Unconstitutional
March 21, 2016
INMATES COUNTED AS OVER 40% OF THE VOTING AGE POPULATION IN ONE DISTRICT, SKEWING VOTING STRENGTH THROUGHOUT COUNTY; DECISION IS FIRST FEDERAL RULING OVERTURNING PRACTICE KNOWN AS “PRISON GERRYMANDERING”
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – March 21, 2016
CONTACT: ACLU of Florida Media Office, media -at- aclufl.org, (786) 363-2737
TALLAHASSEE, FL – A federal court has ruled that district maps for elected offices in Jefferson County, Florida, which included state prison inmates, unconstitutionally diluted the voting power of voters in the other districts. In an order issued in a lawsuit filed on behalf of residents of Jefferson County by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Florida and the Florida Justice Institute (FJI), U.S. District Judge Mark E. Walker held that the practice known as “prison gerrymandering” violated the constitutional rights of Jefferson County residents. It is the first federal court in the country to issue such an opinion |
for the record. I'm not saying if the Dems were faced with the same population issues as the republicans, that dems would not do the same shady stuff. I think they probably would. Because people in power will rob, cheat and steal to keep it. But as of right now. The republicans are the ones for the most part running the ship of cheating and doing whatever it takes(ethical or not) to win elections. at this point in the game, Republicans DO NOT CARE how they win. They just want to win.
And now to answer that last paragraph about the ID's.
i'll let Bill Maher answer it. Yes i know the same Nword saying bill maher.
| Quote: | | “So it’s crazy — but obviously Republicans, because they love the country and because the Constitution, they ask themselves what is that thing that maybe black people can’t get to? What do we have that they don’t have? Well, they take the bus because they’re poor. So they don’t have a car. They don’t need a picture ID. You know, Tagg Romney doesn’t have this problem. He has a picture ID.” |
| Quote: | Because a lot of minorities don’t have much use for them. The most common voter ID is a driver’s license, and minorities are less likely to drive. A 2007 study found that in California, New Mexico, and Washington, whites were more likely to have driver’s licenses than nonwhites. In Orange County, Calif., about 92 percent of white voters had driver’s licenses, compared with only 84 percent of Latino voters and 81 percent of “other” voters. A 2005 study of Wisconsin similarly found that while about 80 percent of white residents had licenses, only about half of African-American and Hispanic residents had licenses.
Minorities are less likely to have driver’s licenses because they are more likely to be poor and to live in urban areas. If you can’t afford a car, or if you don’t need one because you take the bus or subway, you are less likely to have a driver’s license. Students are less likely to have driver’s licenses for the same reasons (plus the fact that they can sometimes rely on student IDs, and may just have not gotten around to getting a driver’s license yet). Moreover, minorities may be more likely to have lost their driver’s licenses: The Wisconsin study found that an estimated 8 percent of Hispanic adults and 17 percent of African-American adults had no current license but had a recent suspension or revocation. Almost half of suspended driver’s licenses were due to failure to pay outstanding fines, which may explain why poor people are less likely to have licenses. |
^^^So once again, you're trying to stop poor people from voting. which entire groups could be considered poor(generally speaking)? latins/african americans.
we already know these groups are ILLEGALLY PROFILED by the law. Which will result in more suspended licenses and more fines that POOR PEOPLE aka latins/african americans can't afford to pay.
taking emotions and ethics out of it for a moment. if you get rid of the guaranteed portion of votes the dems would get out of those two groups, you have enough to win these elections.
If those groups are allowed to vote without jumping thru extra hoops. republicans will lose a ton of elections. Thats just the facts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2017 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| splashmtn wrote: |
And now to answer that last paragraph about the ID's.
i'll let Bill Maher answer it. Yes i know the same Nword saying bill maher.
| Quote: | | “So it’s crazy — but obviously Republicans, because they love the country and because the Constitution, they ask themselves what is that thing that maybe black people can’t get to? What do we have that they don’t have? Well, they take the bus because they’re poor. So they don’t have a car. They don’t need a picture ID. You know, Tagg Romney doesn’t have this problem. He has a picture ID.” |
| Quote: | Because a lot of minorities don’t have much use for them. The most common voter ID is a driver’s license, and minorities are less likely to drive. A 2007 study found that in California, New Mexico, and Washington, whites were more likely to have driver’s licenses than nonwhites. In Orange County, Calif., about 92 percent of white voters had driver’s licenses, compared with only 84 percent of Latino voters and 81 percent of “other” voters. A 2005 study of Wisconsin similarly found that while about 80 percent of white residents had licenses, only about half of African-American and Hispanic residents had licenses.
Minorities are less likely to have driver’s licenses because they are more likely to be poor and to live in urban areas. If you can’t afford a car, or if you don’t need one because you take the bus or subway, you are less likely to have a driver’s license. Students are less likely to have driver’s licenses for the same reasons (plus the fact that they can sometimes rely on student IDs, and may just have not gotten around to getting a driver’s license yet). Moreover, minorities may be more likely to have lost their driver’s licenses: The Wisconsin study found that an estimated 8 percent of Hispanic adults and 17 percent of African-American adults had no current license but had a recent suspension or revocation. Almost half of suspended driver’s licenses were due to failure to pay outstanding fines, which may explain why poor people are less likely to have licenses. |
^^^So once again, you're trying to stop poor people from voting. which entire groups could be considered poor(generally speaking)? latins/african americans.
we already know these groups are ILLEGALLY PROFILED by the law. Which will result in more suspended licenses and more fines that POOR PEOPLE aka latins/african americans can't afford to pay.
taking emotions and ethics out of it for a moment. if you get rid of the guaranteed portion of votes the dems would get out of those two groups, you have enough to win these elections.
If those groups are allowed to vote without jumping thru extra hoops. republicans will lose a ton of elections. Thats just the facts. |
Quick question.. a citizen only has to have a govt issued picture id to vote, right? Why not just make them free to anyone in the state if they are there legally etc? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nickuku
Star Player
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7844
Location: Orange County
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2017 5:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well things sure escalated
_________________
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
What kind of Democratic Nation could consider voting to make their citizens lives considerably more difficult
If our nation was poor or going through hard times..ok..understandable
But if we have enough money to keep bombing everyone then why harm our own citizens too
Had an odd happening yesterday
Read article about us helping Saudi Arabia kill Muslims in Yemen
The country now is in ruins and they have the worst cholera outbreak in history
So the article said the Muslims there know what country the bombs are coming from and it doesn't sit well with them
So last night read how some state had their servers hacked by ISIS supporters
They posted something along the lines of Mr Trump you will pay for the bombs that are killing our people
Just odd timing.
Won't be long til the random (bleep) Britain faces finds its way to our country |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rwongega
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 20510
Location: UCLA -> NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nickuku
Star Player
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7844
Location: Orange County
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rwongega wrote: | | pnp vs LA_Lakers_Rule. Proceed. |
The immovable object vs the unstoppable force.
_________________
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hoopschick29
Franchise Player
Joined: 23 Jul 2004
Posts: 12898
Location: Los Angeles
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Folks writing dissertations in the comments...I really need for you mothersuckers to get some cliff notes training. All this longwinded-ness to say something you can say in 140 characters or less is ridiculous!!
_________________
So glad we gave you your flowers while you were here, Kobe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
32
Retired Number
Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Posts: 73071
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CBO estimates 22 million to lose insurance under GOP health care bill
| Quote: | | Under the GOP health care bill, which is expected to be voted on this week, 15 million people could lose coverage by 2018. By 2026, that number would climb to 22 million. The bill would reduce deficits by $320 billion, the CBO estimates. |
https://twitter.com/i/moments/879436051239976960
_________________
Nobody in the NBA can touch the Laker brand, which, like the uniform color, is pure gold. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kikanga
Retired Number
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29337
Location: La La Land
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 4:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hoopschick29 wrote: | | Folks writing dissertations in the comments...I really need for you mothersuckers to get some cliff notes training. All this longwinded-ness to say something you can say in 140 characters or less is ridiculous!! |
I've had some long posts before. But the walls of text lately have been overwhelming.
LaLakersRule. If you can add in a TLDR (to long, didn't read) summary at the end. That would be awesome. If you're gonna write a short story every post.
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 32 wrote: | CBO estimates 22 million to lose insurance under GOP health care bill
| Quote: | | Under the GOP health care bill, which is expected to be voted on this week, 15 million people could lose coverage by 2018. By 2026, that number would climb to 22 million. The bill would reduce deficits by $320 billion, the CBO estimates. |
https://twitter.com/i/moments/879436051239976960 |
Why does McConnell look even more evil than Sessions
And will any of the 22 million be politicians or their children and grandmother's etc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
splashmtn
Star Player
Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3961
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ContagiousInspiration wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: |
And now to answer that last paragraph about the ID's.
i'll let Bill Maher answer it. Yes i know the same Nword saying bill maher.
| Quote: | | “So it’s crazy — but obviously Republicans, because they love the country and because the Constitution, they ask themselves what is that thing that maybe black people can’t get to? What do we have that they don’t have? Well, they take the bus because they’re poor. So they don’t have a car. They don’t need a picture ID. You know, Tagg Romney doesn’t have this problem. He has a picture ID.” |
| Quote: | Because a lot of minorities don’t have much use for them. The most common voter ID is a driver’s license, and minorities are less likely to drive. A 2007 study found that in California, New Mexico, and Washington, whites were more likely to have driver’s licenses than nonwhites. In Orange County, Calif., about 92 percent of white voters had driver’s licenses, compared with only 84 percent of Latino voters and 81 percent of “other” voters. A 2005 study of Wisconsin similarly found that while about 80 percent of white residents had licenses, only about half of African-American and Hispanic residents had licenses.
Minorities are less likely to have driver’s licenses because they are more likely to be poor and to live in urban areas. If you can’t afford a car, or if you don’t need one because you take the bus or subway, you are less likely to have a driver’s license. Students are less likely to have driver’s licenses for the same reasons (plus the fact that they can sometimes rely on student IDs, and may just have not gotten around to getting a driver’s license yet). Moreover, minorities may be more likely to have lost their driver’s licenses: The Wisconsin study found that an estimated 8 percent of Hispanic adults and 17 percent of African-American adults had no current license but had a recent suspension or revocation. Almost half of suspended driver’s licenses were due to failure to pay outstanding fines, which may explain why poor people are less likely to have licenses. |
^^^So once again, you're trying to stop poor people from voting. which entire groups could be considered poor(generally speaking)? latins/african americans.
we already know these groups are ILLEGALLY PROFILED by the law. Which will result in more suspended licenses and more fines that POOR PEOPLE aka latins/african americans can't afford to pay.
taking emotions and ethics out of it for a moment. if you get rid of the guaranteed portion of votes the dems would get out of those two groups, you have enough to win these elections.
If those groups are allowed to vote without jumping thru extra hoops. republicans will lose a ton of elections. Thats just the facts. |
Quick question.. a citizen only has to have a govt issued picture id to vote, right? Why not just make them free to anyone in the state if they are there legally etc? |
not going to happen.
for 2 reasons.
#1 theirs money to be made off the sells of id's. even if its a little bit of money.
#2. again...that would be too much like right. why do the right thing to make it more accessible for all people to vote? because... i dont want ALL people to vote. I only want people who are going to vote for me and my team to vote. thats the republican way. republicans are trying to make it MORE DIFFICULT for non republicans to vote. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
splashmtn
Star Player
Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3961
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hoopschick29 wrote: | | Folks writing dissertations in the comments...I really need for you mothersuckers to get some cliff notes training. All this longwinded-ness to say something you can say in 140 characters or less is ridiculous!! |
 this aint twitter and most of my stuff is copy and paste information. to make sure LLrule is not confused and thinks I'm giving an opinion. nope. I'm giving facts as they actually are. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52657
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 7:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| splashmtn wrote: | | hoopschick29 wrote: | | Folks writing dissertations in the comments...I really need for you mothersuckers to get some cliff notes training. All this longwinded-ness to say something you can say in 140 characters or less is ridiculous!! |
this aint twitter and most of my stuff is copy and paste information. to make sure LLrule is not confused and thinks I'm giving an opinion. nope. I'm giving facts as they actually are. |
At least demonstrate some common decency and make an effort to cut the quote tree down to accommodate your verbal diarrhea.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Jason Isbell
Man, do those lyrics resonate right now |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| splashmtn wrote: | | hoopschick29 wrote: | | Folks writing dissertations in the comments...I really need for you mothersuckers to get some cliff notes training. All this longwinded-ness to say something you can say in 140 characters or less is ridiculous!! |
this aint twitter and most of my stuff is copy and paste information. to make sure LLrule is not confused and thinks I'm giving an opinion. nope. I'm giving facts as they actually are. |
I visit anandtech political forums and there are a couple of these types who can paste walls of uselessness
Talking pts (bleep) into their skulls and then vomited all over our screens
Good posters over there...for some more sane logic based viewpoints like we keep here |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DaMuleRules wrote: | | splashmtn wrote: | | hoopschick29 wrote: | | Folks writing dissertations in the comments...I really need for you mothersuckers to get some cliff notes training. All this longwinded-ness to say something you can say in 140 characters or less is ridiculous!! |
this aint twitter and most of my stuff is copy and paste information. to make sure LLrule is not confused and thinks I'm giving an opinion. nope. I'm giving facts as they actually are. |
At least demonstrate some common decency and make an effort to cut the quote tree down to accommodate your verbal diarrhea. |
Splash chose not to ignore the troll
He took him on and kept rafting him to shreds
Republicans don't like facts |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Huey Lewis & The News
Star Player
Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Posts: 5234
Location: So what's the uh...topic of discussion?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
